Wayne Prater v. City of Philadelphia

539 F. App'x 35

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Wayne Prater appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, entered after a jury trial in his civil rights case. Prater raises essentially two claims in his brief on appeal: (1) the elimination of the only Black juror in the jury pool violated Batson, 1 and (2) the jury did not follow the instructions given by the judge. We will dismiss the appeal.

It is the appellant’s duty to arrange for the trial transcript, and we may dismiss an appeal if an appellant fails to do so. See Fed. R.App. P. 3(a)(2); 10(b)(1); 3d Cir. L.A.R. 11.1; Richardson v. Henry, 902 F.2d 414, 416 (5th Cir.1990) (dismissing appeal by inmate in civil rights action for failure to provide a transcript). Because Prater did not order transcripts, we have no record of the jury selection process, and similarly cannot assess whether the jury followed the instructions given by the judge. We require the transcript not only to assess the merits of these issues, but to determine whether Prater preserved them for appellate review. Accordingly, we will dismiss the appeal.

1 . Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), holds that the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause bars the use of peremptory strikes to exclude jurors on the basis of race. The Supreme Court has also extended Batson to civil cases. Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc., 500 U.S. 614, 631, 111 S.Ct. 2077, 114 L.Ed.2d 660(1991).